Pathfinder 1E Your experiences with broken Pathfinder characters? (edit: more accurately, w/1 avg PF character when the rest of the party is meh)

[RangerWickett]

I might eventually start a House Rules thread on this topic, but first I wanted to hear what other gamers have experienced on this topic.

I have a group of 7th level PCs:
* A warforged fighter/warforged juggernaut. AC 23.
* A half-orc dragon shaman. AC 20.
* A human summoner. AC 17.
* A human wizard. AC 12.
* aaaand an aasimar sorcerer 3/zen archer monk 4.

The aasimar's AC is 10 + 6 Wisdom + 2 Dex + 1 monk = 19. Typically she adds mage armor (+4 armor), and when she knows trouble's a-brewing she'll add on shield (+4 shield) and reduce person (an extra +1 Dex and +1 size), for a total of AC 29. She asked about the Qiggong Monk, which would have let her trade out slow fall for barkskin, adding another +2, and when I actually looked at her math and realized how ridiculous she was, she pointed out that she hasn't even taken Dodge.

Oh, and her attack bonus as a Zen Archer is +12 (base 4, +6 Wisdom, +1 weapon focus, +1 enhancement), which is the same as the fighter. Plus she runs faster and doesn't have to engage in melee. She has a +7 Reflex save (the fighter has +1).

Now maybe I've drunk too much D&D Next kool-aid, but I hate the amount of math and stacking of weird bonuses that goes on in 3.5/PF. Has anyone successfully fixed the problem? Do I just need to send high level wizards with empowered Magic Missiles at her?

 

[knottyprof]

I am currently DMing a game using the Rise of the Runelords Annivesary edition and when we in the character creation process the Advanced Races Guide had just come out so of course everyone wanted some of the more powerful races found in there (and yes one was an Aasimar monk) and as starting DM (the plan is to rotate after each chapter so everyone gets a chance to play a character) I had so say no or suggest alternatives to tone it down a little. I don't necessarily believe the rules allow broken characters (too powerful?) as much as I think that we as DMs need to learn to scale encounters to prove more of a challenge (to me it seems like the official pathfinder modules are a little too easy anyway, after all the first encounter our party had was a handful of goblins and I even added a couple to try an make it more challenging).

Also (being indoctrinated to the game back in the early 80's) I find the XP level rate to be a bit too rapid. I know pathfinder does offer three different rates of growth but the "Suggested" rate was the first one so if you add to encounters PCs get that much more XP. So it is a catch 22 situation, leave the encounters as is (which to me isn't much of a challenge -at least at low levels it may pick up in a later chapter) or add to them but then give out even more XP which will cause them to level up that much faster.

Magic missiles are effective and I found evil clerics channeling negative energy can be effective at removing hp from party members regardless of the AC as long as their will bonuses suck.

 

[RangerWickett]

Mostly I'm just irked that players who make reasonable choices -- I'm a fighter in plate armor with a shield -- are just blown out of the water by players who know how to take advantage of every nook and cranny of the rules system.

Sure, the fighter could probably make a Dex 22 character with mithral chain, a shield, weapon finesse to attack, plus a potion bracer and a few potions of barkskin and displacement to make himself just as hard to kill. But the obvious, straightforward options are weak.

I'd much rather beat the offending player with a nerf bat than get into some arms race, contorting the game world and the narrative in order to justify enemies who can threaten her.

 

[MortonStromgal]

I might eventually start a House Rules thread on this topic, but first I wanted to hear what other gamers have experienced on this topic.

I have a group of 7th level PCs:
* A warforged fighter/warforged juggernaut. AC 23.
* A half-orc dragon shaman. AC 20.
* A human summoner. AC 17.
* A human wizard. AC 12.
* aaaand an aasimar sorcerer 3/zen archer monk 4.

The aasimar's AC is 10 + 6 Wisdom + 2 Dex + 1 monk = 19. Typically she adds mage armor (+4 armor), and when she knows trouble's a-brewing she'll add on shield (+4 shield) and reduce person (an extra +1 Dex and +1 size), for a total of AC 29. She asked about the Qiggong Monk, which would have let her trade out slow fall for barkskin, adding another +2, and when I actually looked at her math and realized how ridiculous she was, she pointed out that she hasn't even taken Dodge.

Oh, and her attack bonus as a Zen Archer is +12 (base 4, +6 Wisdom, +1 weapon focus, +1 enhancement), which is the same as the fighter. Plus she runs faster and doesn't have to engage in melee. She has a +7 Reflex save (the fighter has +1).

Now maybe I've drunk too much D&D Next kool-aid, but I hate the amount of math and stacking of weird bonuses that goes on in 3.5/PF. Has anyone successfully fixed the problem? Do I just need to send high level wizards with empowered Magic Missiles at her?

I don't think barkskin and mage armor stack. Also not sure about the shield with mage armor but id have to re-read it.

 

[D'karr]

I don't necessarily believe the rules allow broken characters (too powerful?) as much as I think that we as DMs need to learn to scale encounters to prove more of a challenge

I'm sorry but, WHAT?

If the game system at 7th level already allows for a variance of defensive capacity of at least 17 points (AC 29 vs. AC 12)in the same group, it's not a DM challenging problem but a system need serious rework problem. I DM to enjoy myself, not to spend inordinate amounts of time trying to figure out how to mechanically challenge the party.

Magic missiles are effective and I found evil clerics channeling negative energy can be effective at removing hp from party members regardless of the AC as long as their will bonuses suck.

If the only answer to challenge the party is to throw "more magic" at the problem then the system really needs serious rework. Any magic that you throw at the monk, in this case, is doubly effective against the fighter. In the case delineated above attacking will is not the answer.

Thanks for the reminder of why I stopped DMing 3.x and Pathfinder.

 

[Dandu]

I don't think barkskin and mage armor stack. Also not sure about the shield with mage armor but id have to re-read it.

Assuming that they work like their 3.5e counterparts, they provide different kinds of armor bonuses.

Here's the thing; if you're going Monk Archer (Dex, Wis) and are a Sorcerer (needs some Cha) what do your other stats look like? If you're nigh-unhittable, for example, but can't do damage due to low strength, enemies can just walk past you, slaughter the party, and finish you off at their leisure.

And there's certainly ways to negate an archer even if they do deal damage.

Trip the monk. Initiating a trip is a touch attack, followed by a strength check.

Cut off the monk. Wall of Ice is a 4th level spell, and it can form a hemisphere around someone.

Sunder the bow. Cast Wind Wall. You get the idea.

 

[Gorgoroth]

The problem is the stacking bonus math, not the player, IMO. I would house rule that plate armor gets more AC and that shield and mage armor cannot stack, or that perhaps two sources of magical protection, use only the highest. PF is definitely broken AC-wise. I made a level 10 synthesist once with 31 AC, 5 attacks, large size, good fly speed + maneuverability, could cast haste, invis, heal himself, had double the HP of a fighter, better stats than all of the other PCs, spell resist, etc. They totally screwed the pooch with that one. Apparently straight up summoners are even better than synthesists, since your pet get its own actions (I think).

Don't nerf the player so much as apply a system-wide house rule. I'd even bump plate armor higher, or provide more gradients.

I wonder if anyone out there is working on a PF mod to flatten the math. At the same time, it would kill those dreaded iterative attacks maths. What a nightmare.

 

[knottyprof]

I'm sorry but, WHAT?

If the game system at 7th level already allows for a variance of defensive capacity of at least 17 points (AC 29 vs. AC 12)in the same group, it's not a DM challenging problem but a system need serious rework problem. I DM to enjoy myself, not to spend inordinate amounts of time trying to figure out how to mechanically challenge the party.



If the only answer to challenge the party is to throw "more magic" at the problem then the system really needs serious rework. Any magic that you throw at the monk, in this case, is doubly effective against the fighter. In the case delineated above attacking will is not the answer.

Thanks for the reminder of why I stopped DMing 3.x and Pathfinder.

A game is what players and DMs make of it (and there is always option to play something else which apparently you have already chosen) and that is why most groups have house rules because their opinions on game rules. AC is just one factor of a character (AC variance in any D&D edition will always be an issue just the way the mechanic works in the game and the fact that arcane casters are much more limited compared to other classes). My biggest complaint about 3.5/Pathfinder versus earlier editions is the minutia of details that can slow the game down, especially combat.

Also, Magic isn't the only means to deal with high AC mid-level characters. Throw a regiment of Frost or Fire Giants at them. If the giants can close to melee their attack bonuses would be pretty effective even against an AC of 29. I am just saying DMs have to consider the composition of the party and design (or alter) encounters to make it more challenging. Also, what is good for the goose is good for the gander so using similar buffs for NPCs would not be out of the question. After all if the Aasimar sorcerer/zen archer monk exists what is stopping the DM from making an effective fiendish counterpart?

 

[sheadunne]

A 7th level fighter could have higher stats. (These are quick stats and I make no promises about the math)

With a Str 20 and a Dex 16

Attack at a +15/+10

BAB 7/2
+1 weapon
+5 str
+1 weapon focus
+1 weapon training

Have an AC of around 31

+10 base
+11 full plate +2
+4 heavy shield +2
+1 ring of protection +1
+2 amulet of natural armor +2
+3 Dexterity

Anyway, the system has its problems.

 

[Fiddleback]

It's at times like these (and at the start of any new game) that I like to remind myself and my players that anything the PCs are allowed to do, so are the NPCs.

You want to stack on a bunch of crazy templates and you've got the rules options to back it? (Crazy feral vampire lycanthrope monk thing from The Book of Really Asinine Player Options?) Go for it! Just don't be surprised when you suddenly find yourself facing threats from those same rules options. (Insane Fast Plane Shifting Doppleganger Assassins armed with wooden spears worked in a lovely silver filigree from the same set of rules.)

The GMs job is always to challenge the players. Not let them stroll casually through a fantasy world untouched. There's nothing heroic about that.